SEC’s Crypto Staking Revelation: A Comedy of Errors and Securities

by

In a most curious twist of fate, the esteemed US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), that venerable institution of financial oversight, has deigned to share its profound insights on the matter of crypto staking. This revelation comes in the wake of a clamorous demand for clarity, as if the very heavens had opened to bestow wisdom upon the bewildered masses. The SEC, in its infinite wisdom, seeks to “provide greater clarity on the application of the federal securities laws to crypto assets.” Ah, clarity! A rare gem in the murky waters of regulation! 💎

SEC Offers Clarity On Crypto Staking

On a fateful Thursday, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, perhaps inspired by the musings of a Dostoevskian protagonist, issued new guidance on Protocol Staking. They boldly proclaimed that most of these activities are not ensnared by the clutches of US securities laws and “don’t need to register with the Commission transactions under the Securities Act.” What a relief! One can almost hear the sighs of relief echoing through the crypto corridors! 😅

In its grandiloquent statement, the regulatory agency elucidated that certain staking activities on Proof-of-Stake (PoS) networks are not deemed securities transactions under the watchful eye of federal regulations. The SEC, in its infinite wisdom, explained that this new guidance pertains to the staking of cryptocurrencies “intrinsically linked to the programmatic functioning of a public, permissionless network.” A mouthful, indeed! 🍽️

Thus, these activities—self-staking, self-custodial staking with direct third-party validators, and custodial staking where platforms stake assets on behalf of customers—do not meet the criteria for an investment contract under the Howey Test. No securities here, folks! Just a delightful dance of digital assets! 💃

Journalist Eleanor Terret, with a flair for the dramatic, highlighted that the SEC’s statement “is a big deal for ETF providers who want to offer staking.” It clarifies that “staking in this format is generally not thought of as a securities transaction by the Division of Corporation Finance.” A veritable triumph for the ETF enthusiasts! 🎉

However, the guidance, like a half-hearted apology, noted that it does not address all staking practices. “This statement addresses Protocol Staking generally rather than all of its variations,” they cautioned. Further, it does not touch upon the so-called ‘liquid staking,’ ‘restaking,’ or ‘liquid restaking.’ A veritable buffet of confusion remains! 🍽️

‘Stake It Till You Make It’?

In the wake of this news, SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce, perhaps channeling the spirit of a modern-day Raskolnikov, stated that the new guidance “provides welcome clarity for stakers.” The uncertainty surrounding regulatory views had, until now, discouraged Americans from engaging in staking activities, lest they fall afoul of the securities laws. “Providing Security is not a ‘Security,’” she affirmed, adding that the unclear rules “artificially constrained participation in network consensus and undermined the decentralization, censorship resistance, and credible neutrality of proof-of-stake blockchains.” A noble sentiment, indeed! 🕊️

The new guidance follows the industry’s fervent call for clear staking rules, where a coalition of nearly 30 industry players and advocacy groups beseeched the SEC to offer clarity. As reported by Bitcoinist, the Crypto Council for Innovation’s (CCI) Proof of Stake Alliance (POSA) sent a letter signed by 29 industry giants to the SEC’s Crypto Task Force on April 30. A veritable army of advocates! ⚔️

Acknowledging the SEC’s regulatory shift under the Trump administration, the letter argued that the existing securities disclosure regime was ill-suited for staking services, which are fundamentally technical rather than financial. A profound observation, indeed! 🧐

However, not all SEC Commissioners were in harmonious agreement with the new guidance. Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw, in a Thursday statement, expressed her discontent, claiming that “staff ignores how its conclusions conflict with that applicable law.” A clash of titans, if you will! ⚔️

Crenshaw opined that the Division of Corporation Finance’s analysis “may reflect what some wish the law to be, but it does not square with the court decisions on staking and the longstanding Howey precedent on which they are based.” She affirmed that “This is yet another example of the SEC’s ongoing ‘fake it ‘till we make it’ approach to crypto – taking action based on anticipation of future changes while ignoring existing law.” A biting critique, indeed! 🥴

Read More

2025-05-31 15:43